Report message to a moderator

[Updated on: Fri, 16 July 2004 14:17]

Report message to a moderator

[Updated on: Sat, 17 July 2004 15:58]

Report message to a moderator

[Updated on: Sat, 17 July 2004 16:53]

Report message to a moderator

Hi!

multilis wrote on Sat, 17 July 2004 22:34

Faced with Kotk as a QS with 9 other HP and with me in the opposite end of the universe, and following the described 'ethics' and I may join in against him. I gain from the tech sharing, ship+planet trading, and other cooperation that come from working with 8 other players, we all get a chance to safely bloom into HP powers.

OTOH if you join QS you gain tech from him AND part of a territory of QS's victim AND temporary safety from QS's attack. Wouldn't that make you stronger then to play as a peer among other equal HPs?

Quote:

And on the other hand if you say then play HP rather than QS, you then face the opposite early Sotek suprise attack described which if done well will take down an HP. IMO all you are doing with this 'only ok to cooperate against #1' logic is favouring races like SD -f, and penalising races like IT -f who needs a strong start and HE 3i who needs to become strong to compensate lack of gates.

Man, you sound like you got kicked badly in a game or two. But that's a part of Stars! Every race and econ model can be successful in certain situation, and destroyed in another one. One part of success is to recognize conditions in the universe and design proper race. But there are many random factors you can't control: the strongest of them is planet draw, the second one is neighbour draw. If they are against you then your race will fall among the first.
I have only one general rule when playing Stars!: never be deliberately weak. The rest is just a matter of execution . So far I've been quite successful at that.
BR, Iztok

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

multilis wrote on Sun, 18 July 2004 18:24

In the situation I describe #1 is toast. No diplomacy in world would allow Kotk to save his QS if all the HP's stick together on delaying war and not giving territory.

Delaying a war? HOW? How HP delay a war with QS? All HP can do if neighbour QS decides it is not needed on the map by 2440 is to die. That may the hard bill to swallow for HP but nothing really to do with it. Even AR has more chances against QS in that 2425-2440 timeframe.

Not *giving* territory? To QS? Who controls the territory? What HP can resist QS from just *taking* whatever he wants or stopping any of his shipments? Sure if QS player got noteworthy diplo skill he can make some HP neighbour to think that they gave something to QS or that they "traded" some planets.

Whatever ... if that QS fails or wins is indifferent. Its interesting to play such QS. If that QS however manages to pick 2 bigger HP-s from the rest of them and ally with them without exit clause then the game is broken for the rest of the universe and ACTUALLY for them too.

[Updated on: Mon, 19 July 2004 02:41]

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Why you say i am so wrong? I trust i can play alone against 3 HP-s allied in small dense and win with QS. Easily! Why you think i cant back my words? QS is not #1 monster if it does not cripple its neighbours or intersettle with them. So any pile of HP-s have to gang to beat me with QS.

QS gets its HW que green at 2415 while HP gets there about 2425. QS has like 10 years head research there. At 2425 it has bazooka frigates and 3-4 production breeders. Poor HP-s have only 3 HW-s that just come up and start to research. So it is the time to produce 2-3 fleets and go directly after HP HW-s. If its down there are half the resources gone. If one takes QS into game he has to play it QS way.

But you are just mixing every possible terminology up ARs, QSs and NFs ??? Use the abbreviations faq first before bringing any examples where QS (actually AR) is doomed against 10 HP-s medium normal/dense. I know it myself AR is doomed there, and Sotek probably learned it too now. AR has no production capacity no minerals of QS. It is just -f without mines and ability to pop drop.

Even if i somehow lose 1:3 against 3 HP-s i have LOT OF FUN playing that QS. Your bla-bla has nothing to do with the fact that if i wimpyly ally with 3 HP-s around me intersettle with them and spoil the game then i feel damn quilty for others because the game suck for them and nothing fun there.

Report message to a moderator

[Updated on: Mon, 19 July 2004 15:43]

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Yup. Few people like to cause others pain, even within the context of the game. Especially others you have worked with and are friendly with.

I find it enjoyable to work in cooperation with others, to plan joint wars, to coordinate mineral transfers, etc. Especially when we work together to bring another, bigger race down.

Hold on, that's a contradiction. Didn't I say that few like to cause others pain.

Well, destroying others has its pleaseures too. Even when it comes to backstabbing. Example:

I am in a game (gotta be careful to give as little as possible away) where at one point I had every other race set to friend. Some were closer than others, but I was pretty much tech trading or sharing info or negotiating intersettlement with everyone. Of course this situation can't last, and so I picked some races that I thought would make better friends in an alliance. Not the #1 or #2 guy (I was #8 at this point). I used the diplomatic information I was getting to determine where "hot spots" were developing and picked sides in the conflict where my help was needed most. I used the friendly status with the others to lead some of them on into thinking they had my support when that fleet I was massing was meant to destroy them. Was this backstabbing? Probably. But there's no reasonable expectation for me to stay friendly with all races, and there was no formal agreement between me and anyone. And I didn't pick the allies that would be most beneficial to my own ranking, or the enemies that would be best for myself to destroy. I'm hoping I picked the allies and enemies that will make the game the most interesting it can be.

EDIT: I have to say now (just so ppl don't say I helped the bigger guy with no gain for myself) that I think now I have a reasonable shot at winning this game.

Ok end example.

I felt comfortable turning against those I had helped and those that had helped me because I was helping others I had helped and who had helped me more. If that makes any sense.


With regard to one victor only games, its obvious that an alliance cannot last. So the alliance members are going to have to ditch their conscience and kill their ally. I would understand in such a game. But then, I would be prepared for such an eventuality.

[Updated on: Mon, 19 July 2004 18:11]

Report message to a moderator

[Updated on: Mon, 19 July 2004 18:13]

Report message to a moderator

Why i have to say it 10 times that AR is no QS? I play AR most of the time. It has to be played like -f not like QS. What has AR at 90% breeder world with station? ~400 resources like -fs breeder dock. Does it have ability to pop drop? No, so it misses best early weapon of -f. Does it have growth & hab of -f? No, so it is bit weaker than -f but it has to be played like -f. Sotek did it and i applaud.

But, 500 mines are nothing since -F has it on each breeder and QS has normally lot more per each production breeder. QS would get that terraforming and mining equipment too, wont it? QS has 1000 resources on each breeder with dock. AR needs double more breeders to be comparable production-wise and has still nothing like minerals to build it flat-out 10 years from 2425 to 2435. So stop comparing dick with finger.

multilis wrote on Mon, 19 July 2004 21:39

Ok, do you wish a duel where you control a QS, and 3 other players control HP races that were not designed as a team and all of them are completely allied (and against you) till they bring down '#1'? And you being QS are obviously #1.

Why not? I suspect its hard to find competitiors here because i have lot more chance to win such duel than to lose. It would be a fun duel for me. Just usual HP-s not some sort of pre-set team of hybrides there and i make quite std QS. I wont take CA if they agree to not take CA.

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Kotk wrote on Tue, 20 July 2004 08:06

Carn wrote on Tue, 20 July 2004 14:51 If those HPs are SD, wouldn't make that things harder for you? Probably it would make things more equal early. Anything is OK with me besides pre-designed team.

I'd play one of the HP's. I guarantee I won't have a military ally, but that wouldn't stop me from trading tech. I'd like to see a QS beat 3 unallied HP's, but I want a front row seat.

-Matt

Report message to a moderator

Good! Any other interested parties?

I actually got similar feeling. I have felt i can do it in actual game. Quite early. I had to avoid doing it for general strategy reasons... however i would love to see it from that front seat.

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

[Updated on: Wed, 21 July 2004 13:27]

Report message to a moderator

[Updated on: Wed, 21 July 2004 14:17]

Report message to a moderator

multilis wrote on Wed, 21 July 2004 11:13

Why i have to say it 10 times that AR is no QS? I play AR most of the time. It has to be played like -f not like QS. Have you ever played AR with extra 500 mines in the beginning and free terraforming for all early colonies?

That is why I never commented on the whole AR QS line. An AR without the worry of early minerals *would* be a QS. I very much doubt any experienced AR player would argue against this point.

Quote:

I assume that the AR coloniser is a fairly good early bomber against the smaller initial colonies that spring up. Perhaps I am wrong.

Nope, your not. Wow, 2 in a row!

Quote:

I assume that all 3 HPs would be required to working together against the #1 QS monster, though perhaps not allied as mlaub says.

Phooey on that. If you are my neighbor, and are in my way...It won't matter if you are the QS, or another HP.

I assumed it would be a "normal" game with no pre-existing alliances or co-operation assummed. Only the fact that the QS will gunning for the HP's, eventually. <shrug> So, a normal game for me... I'd still be willing to TT with everyone, but only after "normal" ingame negotiations.

Quote:

My real life is more busy than usual as well. So not sure if I can manage before Trans is over. Since it would be a 4 player game we could likely have hosted on Autohost, perhaps medium density small universe.

Well, we need a 3rd HP. I wouldn't mind if the game puttered along until the end of summer. How about getting it set up, and play 3-4 turns during the week till everyone is ready to go faster?

-Matt

Report message to a moderator

Hmm. You too, Matt.
Lets not forget that all get the same support ships not only AR. AR feels still a bit like -F CA while JOAT or IT QS feels like 130% of QS CA. In my tests. QS and -F goals and strategies are slightly different (again just for me maybe?). Ahh.. enough of that.

As for 1/2500 pop eff and 15/7/20+ factories HE-s as being HP-s it feels a bit different? Can it be called normal HP just for purities sake of the experiment? I played once one in a small game and it has nice growth, almost costless TT and is quite easy to intersettle with anyone, especially with radiation immunity. So such race feels a bit like trying to gain from the fact that one cannot precooperate but knows that he has 2 allies in game.

Report message to a moderator

Quote:

So such race feels a bit like trying to gain from the fact that one cannot precooperate but knows that he has 2 allies in game.

I think you have got my perspective on this thread and not just for this game. HE 3i has diplomatic strengths that help compensate for its weaknesses (like the human race in MOO).

The gateless part also helps negotiate planets (can't later use them to gate in enemy horde into other players core).

As well, 3i HE will likely have more resources (from more planets) in the end which are needed to help compensate for gateless weakness.

Report message to a moderator